Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: epicure who wrote (219553)	2/19/2007 5:14:07 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (3) of 281500

I don't know how you can say that Bush depended on CIA intel when Bush ignored all the caveats from the CIA and only fastened on that which meshed with his already laid plans. The distinction here is between intel and analysis. Bush DID rely on the intel that the CIA was providing, he just came up with a different analysis, adding in some factors that the CIA thought should be ignored, like the likelihood of Saddam sending Iraqi intelligence to help Al Quada perpetrate another 9/11. But Bush needed to make a public case for the war, and he relied heavily on the "slam-dunk case" for WMDs that Tenet provided for his public arguments. Which blew up in his face when no stockpiles were found in Iraq. No matter how machievellian you believe Bush was, it makes no sense to believe that he would have willingly relied on an argument that he knew was going to fall flat as soon as he was in Iraq. He could have relied on other angles, such as the humanitarian catastrophe that was Saddam's Iraq, or the open aid that Saddam was giving to Palestinian terrorists.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next